Tag Archives: curiosity

Promptism – A flat earth metaphor

I read an interesting article by Sune Selsbæk-Reitz, on a word he sort of invented for asking and believing what AI shares, Promptism. The article, The Earth Is Flat, defines this new word: “Promptism is the quiet belief that if I just ask my question clearly enough, I’ll get something true in return. Maybe even something wise.”

And the article describes how promptism is killing curiosity, and providing ‘truths’ that may not be truthful, and yet are being taken as so at face value without questioning.

From the article:

“The ritual is the same every time:

Ask the machine. Get the word.

Move on.

We don’t think of it as belief, because there’s no incense, no robes, no temple. But there’s authority. And there’s trust. And there’s something deeply seductive about being given something that feels final. Even when it isn’t. Even when the certainty is a performance.

Because the thing is: the more fluent the answer, the more invisible the framing becomes. And if we don’t pause to notice that… we’ll mistake fluency for truth, and coherence for proof.”

The article continues:

“But with ChatGPT or Gemini, the answer arrives fully dressed.

Paragraphs. Polished tone. No seams. No links. Just a voice that sounds sure of itself.

That’s not just convenience. It’s a design choice. And it’s flattening how we think. Because friction – the pause, the doubt, the need to look something up – isn’t a flaw in the process of knowing. It is the process. That little jolt of uncertainty that sends you looking deeper?

That’s what makes knowledge stick.

That’s how you learn.”

…“And the more we do this, the more we forget that knowledge was never meant to arrive fully formed.”

I’ve noticed how this has affected me. I don’t go two or three pages into Google anymore. I don’t find tangent, related, and interesting ideas and connections. I ask an LLM, I get an answer, or I refine my question and ask again. I seek an immediate answer, and I accept that answer.

No more new tabs, no clicking links, just a single conversation, and a sort of final answer. The internet is getting flatter. The depth of search shallower. Promptism is the new search… and I wonder what the consequences are, what the price is, in finding convenient ‘truths’ that we just accept, and don’t bother researching or questioning?

Side trips

I went on a hike with my youngest today. We were headed to a falls that we never made it to. But we didn’t care that we missed it. On the way we passed a bridge over a small creek, and I’d explored that creek before. So, we went off the beaten path and took a little side trip.

There was a small path, we weren’t trail blazing, but it is not a main path, and quite secluded.

The side trip was the best part of the hike. That’s often the case. The unexpected detour, the restaurant off the main strip, or the unscheduled stop become the highlight.

It’s the same thing in education. You start a lesson. A kid asks a question and you venture way off your plan, but everyone is engaged and the learning is rich.

The important thing is that you create the conditions for the side trips to happen. You have a plan, but it’s not cast in stone. You have an agenda but you leave room for opportunities to arise. You explore, question, and follow your curiosity.

After our side trip we took the harder route that takes us to a lower falls then a steep climb to the upper falls. We saw the lower one, then didn’t realize we had higher to go for the high falls when we met the path downhill. 10 minutes later we realized our mistake but had to head home so my daughter could make her afternoon plans.

It didn’t matter. The rest of the hike was a fun father/daughter trek. The main falls will be explored another day, and the side trip became the main quest.